Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Six senators to watch in Kagan confirmation

1. With a sedate Day One of Elena Kagan's Supreme Court confirmation behind us, Tuesday is expected to be a bit more lively as the question-and-answer phase begins.

Here's six Senators on the Judiciary Committee to keep an eye on during today's proceedings:

* Orrin Hatch: The Utah Republican voted to confirm Kagan as solicitor general in 2009. But, he has also watched his Beehive State colleague Bob Bennett swept out of office last month by conservatives unhappy with some votes they deemed less than acceptable. With Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R) waiting in the wings to challenge Hatch in 2012, can the incumbent afford to be anything but tough on Kagan and then vote against her? And, if he doesn't, might that be an early indication that a retirement is in the offing?

* Lindsey Graham: Graham is the Republican who Democrats have come to love -- viewing him as fair-minded and not overly partisan. But Graham is a very savvy politician and understands that he can only venture so far from his conservative base without getting into real trouble. Having already voted to confirm Sonia Sotomayor to the Court, will Graham poke his base in the eye again with a "yes" vote on Kagan? He seemed to be undecided during his opening statement on Monday, telling the nominee that her hearing would be "probative and meaningful."

* Arlen Specter: Long a titan of the Judiciary Committee as a Republican, Specter, was a, well, specter of his former self during the 2009 Sotomayor confirmation hearings, as he used the event to prove to Democrats that he was one of them after switching parties earlier in the year. It didn't quite work out, as he lost his primary fight to Rep. Joe Sestak. Now that Specter is unencumbered by electoral concerns and calculations for the first time in decades, how will he treat Kagan?

* Dick Durbin/Chuck Schumer: Durbin, of Illinois, and Schumer, of New York, are competing in a behind-the-scenes battle to become the next Democratic leader of the Senate if Harry Reid (Nev.) loses his re-election fight this fall. Rarely will you get a better chance to see their differing approaches and rate their overall effectiveness than Tuesday as the two men will question the nominee within 30 minutes (or so) of one another. You can bet their colleagues will be watching to see which one performs better as the caucus weighs its options if Reid comes up short.

* Al Franken: The Sotomayor hearings amounted to a public debut of sorts for the comedian turned Minnesota Democratic senator. And, while Franken did occasionally crack wise, he was generally a low-profile presence on the committee. With another year of Senate service under his belt, does Franken take a different approach to this confirmation? With liberals expressing some concerns about Kagan's past policy positions (or, more accurately, her lack of past policy positions) will Franken take the mantle as liberal champion on the committee and try to draw her out?

2. American Crossroads, a conservative independent group, is launching its second television ad in the last three weeks targeting Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (Nev.).

The commercial is designed to rebut the tagline of Reid's own ads: "No one can do more." It quotes Reid on the Senate floor calling it a "big day in America...only 36,000 people lost their jobs today" before asking "Really, Harry?" and noting that Nevada's unemployment rate is now the highest in the country.

American Crossroads is spending $120,000 on the ad, roughly the same amount they spent on their first commercial, which hit Reid on his support for President Obama's $787 billion stimulus package.

The group, formed this spring by a number of GOP heavyweights, has set a $50 million fundraising goal but, to date, has fallen well short of that mark. American Crossroads president Steven Law has said publicly that the organization, which was set up as a 527, has commitments in the range of $30 million.

Reid, for his part, has been up for weeks with ads hitting former state Assemblywoman Sharron Angle (R) as outside of the mainstream. Angle, the somewhat surprising winner of the primary, has yet to air any ads as she seeks to put a staff and fundraising operation in place quickly.

3. Former Colorado Lt. Gov. Jane Norton began airing a radio ad Monday that attacks Weld County prosecutor Ken Buck, evidence that the one-time frontrunner for the state's GOP Senate nomination needs to make up ground in advance of the Aug. 10 primary.

The ad describes Buck as a "government lawyer who doesn't follow the rules," noting that when Buck served as a lawyer in the Clinton administration he was "investigated for an ethics violation." (At issue is a case involving a gun shop in which Buck downplayed the severity of the allegations to defense lawyers, a legal no-no.)

"Washington is already full of politicians who need ethics courses," says the ad's narrator. "Ken Buck? He'd fit right in."

The ad comes approximately a week after a Denver Post poll showed Buck with a double-digit lead over Norton, who enjoys significant establishment support in Colorado and Washington.

Norton also picked up the endorsement of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce Monday. Bill Miller, the chamber's senior vice president and political director, called Norton "an invaluable leader who has a common sense approach to job creation and getting America back on the road to recovery." The chamber also touted its record of endorsing successful candidates, noting that in 2008, 81 percent of the candidates it backed won election.

4. Former eBay CEO Meg Whitman (R) and state Attorney General Jerry Brown (D) have agreed to a televised debate in what's sure to be a must-watch event in California's hotly contested gubernatorial race.

The Dominican University/NBC debate, which will be the first head-to-head matchup between the two candidates, will take place in October. Whitman had already agreed to the debate; Brown announced his agreement Monday in a release listing nine other debates and forums in which he has agreed to participate. Whitman, meanwhile, declined an invitation this week from the California Nurses Association to speak to its members next month.

Meanwhile, California Working Families, a liberal outside group funded by organized labor and the Democratic Governors Association launched a new TV ad Monday portraying Whitman as a candidate who would provide "tax breaks for corporations and the wealthy, but nothing for the middle class."

"As CEO, Whitman hid her profits offshore to avoid paying taxes. She ranked second among CEOs for personal use of corporate jets. That's Whitman's world," says the ad's narrator.

The ad highlights the fact that Whitman's fortune is a dual-edged sword: on the one hand, she has millions (and millions) at her disposal in her battle against Brown. On the other, she remains vulnerable to attacks on her business background, particularly as the state grapples with a $19 billion budget deficit.

Brown stumbled soon after he won the Democratic nomination, making what he said he thought were off-the-record remarks comparing Whitman's ad campaign to Nazi propaganda. He has since worked to make up ground, but has appeared to struggle at times with the strictures of waging a modern-day campaign; his camp took 10 hours to respond, for instance, to a Whitman attack ad late last week.

5. Rep. Jerry Moran has a 20-point lead on Rep. Todd Tiahrt in the Kansas Republican Senate primary, according to a new SurveyUSA poll.

The poll, which was conducted via automated phone calls, showed Moran beating Tiahrt 53 percent to 33 percent, a result largely unchanged from a Survey USA poll released last month that showed Moran ahead 52 percent to 29 percent. Both men are running for the seat being vacated by Sen. Sam Brownback's (R) who is running for governor.

Moran appears poised to win the primary, which is serving as the de facto general election in heavily conservative Kansas where no Democrat has won a Senate seat since 1932. Moran also has a cash edge over Tiahrt; Moran had $3.5 million on hand at the end of March as compared to $1.5 million for Tiahrt.

Tiahrt is hoping several high profile endorsers -- former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin and former White House senior adviser Karl Rove to name two -- make clear to primary voters that he is the only true conservative in the Aug. 3 primary.

With Felicia Sonmez and Aaron Blake

By Chris Cillizza  |  June 29, 2010; 7:23 AM ET
Categories:  Morning Fix  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Byrd special election to be held in 2012
Next: It's not easy being (Rory) Reid

Comments

KAGAN'S GOT "NO QUALMS" ABOUT THE DEATH PENALTY? REALLY?

Kagan had me under a spell until I heard her say she had no moral "qualms" about the constitutionality of the death penalty.

She make the remark under skeptical questioning by Senator Dick Durbin about whether the death penalty could be fairly applied, given so many documented cases concerning innocent people being put to death by the State.

Kagan could have said the death penalty was "settled law," a factual statement, and stopped there. Instead, she felt compelled to add the "no qualms" comment.

That addendum struck he as insensitive to American history, and self-serving -- the statement of an elist who is out of touch with the cold realities of American life.

Perhaps she is a "corporate statist" after all.

Her death penalty answer, coupled with her approval of indefinite detention of "suspected terrorists"-- in both cases, an assumption that the rights of the State trump the human rights of individuals, should disqualify her for the High Court -- in a perfect world.

I hope someone sends her this and that she considers revising her position to better fit with the cruel facts of life and death in America.

http://NowPublic.com/scrivener (lede stories and links therein)

Posted by: scrivener50 | June 29, 2010 6:06 PM | Report abuse

I think there's a dead blog under the dishwasher, that would explain the smell and all the flies buzzing around.

Phew.

Posted by: Noacoler | June 29, 2010 4:59 PM | Report abuse

"As soon as we can eliminate that particular pest"

Sends a fascist thrill up your leg, doesn't it, bumble?

Posted by: mattintx | June 29, 2010 4:34 PM | Report abuse

Heatwave, I thought you were banned under 37th? Weren't you the one telling others that if they were banned they should stay away?

Got nothing else going on in your life?

Posted by: JRM2 | June 29, 2010 3:42 PM | Report abuse

The man who is tenacious of purpose in a rightful cause is not shaken from his firm resolve by the frenzy of his fellow citizens clamoring for what is wrong, or by the tyrant's threatening countenance.

Horace 'Ibid. iii, l.' 1
http://tinkys1941.spaces.live.com/blog/cns!DCD7544ECCB8065F!300.entry

Posted by: edtroyhampton | June 29, 2010 3:38 PM | Report abuse

Absolutely amazing how Kagan tries to stand on Harvard's "anti-discrimination" policy.


And she uses this to justify her position against gays in the military.

HOWEVER - when it comes to admissions, Harvard Law has a massive AFFIRMATIVE ACTION PROGRAM - which is separate categories based on RACE - and DIFFERENT STANDARDS FOR EACH CATEGORY.


So, where does Kagan's "anti-discrimination" policy come in on ADMISSIONS ???

Seems like the liberals again are COMPLETELY DECEPTIVE AND DISHONEST - these words mean one thing when they want it to mean something, and a completely different thing in other areas. It really is a joke.


.

Posted by: Heatwave | June 29, 2010 3:09 PM | Report abuse

bklyndan22


Obama promised the country during the 2008 campaign that he would not purposely TANK the Afghan War.

He did that because he didn't want to be seen as a crazy leftist who would leave our country open to terrorism.

Sounds like that was ANOTHER OBAMA LIE.

I don't think Obama could have EVER been elected if he said he was going to get out of Afghanistan and leave the place to be run over by terrorists.


This was just one element of trust which the nation put in Obama - TRUST WHICH HAS BEEN BETRAYED.


Obama has done nothing but deceive and lie.

It is a disgrace - OBAMA IS A FRAUD.

Sorry - but there are just some things about Obama which he ASSURED the nation during the campaing - ASSURANCES that Obama knew without which he would not be elected.

Those are the acceptable parameters of what it means to run this country - there is an acceptable range of action.

TANKING A WAR ON PURPOSE is out of bounds.

Obama is a FRAUD.


.

Posted by: Heatwave | June 29, 2010 2:27 PM | Report abuse


Obama's Afghan War.


By announcing the July 2012 pull-out date, Obama hurt the Surge more than the entire Taliban army.


A leftist dream, huh ?


Henry Kissinger said that if we want to win, we have to signal that we are staying - the whole war is a disaster right now - Obama has made it extremely difficult to build allies in the populace with this pull-out date.


Obama's war is a disaster.


Thank you Biden.

.

Posted by: Heatwave | June 29, 2010 12:50 PM

A. The date is July 2011--and after 10 years its about damned time.
B. Kissinger"s and Nixon's " resolute" theorizing got 20,000 more Americans killed, destabilized Cambodia, unleashing the horror of Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge;
C. Bush built no alliances in hios 2 terms save with a venal, corrupt regime led by Hamis Karzai that rules nothing outside of Kabul, and is heavily invested in the SAME drug trade that provides the Taliban its funding.

Obama boxed himself in during the campaign calling it the "good war", but the bottom line is that it is untenable. There are no partners other than drug lords and tribal warlords (often one & the same). The country has been fragmented for a thousand years; we could stay ther for one hundred an do nothing but die and waste money.

It is time to let the 1 percent of this country doing the suffering and dying come home with honor. The rest of us have ignored and blinded ourselves to the Afghan reality--no sacrifices, no support beyond facile magnetic symbols and mouthed platitudes. Bring the troops home and use the 6 billion a month HERE.

Posted by: bklyndan22 | June 29, 2010 2:16 PM | Report abuse


Obama's Afghan War.


By announcing the July 2012 pull-out date, Obama hurt the Surge more than the entire Taliban army.


A leftist dream, huh ?


Henry Kissinger said that if we want to win, we have to signal that we are staying - the whole war is a disaster right now - Obama has made it extremely difficult to build allies in the populace with this pull-out date.


Obama's war is a disaster.


Thank you Biden.

.

Posted by: Heatwave | June 29, 2010 12:50 PM

A. The date is July 2011--and after 10 years its about damned time.
B. Kissinger"s and Nixon's " resolute" theorizing got 20,000 more Americans killed, destabilized Cambodia, unleashing the horror of Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge;
C. Bush built no alliances in hios 2 terms save with a venal, corrupt regime led by Hamis Karzai that rules nothing outside of Kabul, and is heavily invested in the SAME drug trade that provides the Taliban its funding.

Obama boxed himself in during the campaign calling it the "good war", but the bottom line is that it is untenable. There are no partners other than drug lords and tribal warlords (often one & the same). The country has been fragmented for a thousand years; we could stay ther for one hundred an do nothing but die and waste money.

It is time to let the 1 percent of this country doing the suffering and dying come home with honor. The rest of us have ignored and blinded ourselves to the Afghan reality--no sacrifices, no support beyond facile magnetic symbols and mouthed platitudes. Bring the troops home and use the ^ billion a month HERE.

Posted by: bklyndan22 | June 29, 2010 2:16 PM | Report abuse

Kagan will be the Obama of the Supreme Court
Keith Riler
Now more of us understand that running a successful political campaign does not qualify one to be President. Real job qualifications matter when it comes to oil leaks, fiscal stimulus and unemployment, the deficit, Iranian nukes, relationships with our allies, infrastructure modernization and government transparency. If we have learned anything, it is to ask harder questions and not presume "it can't be any worse."

Our unqualified President has now nominated an unqualified judicial nominee. Given his recent very public shortfalls, that he still does not understand the value of experience is startling.

Barack Obama has proposed Elena Kagan, who has no judicial experience, as his Supreme Court nominee. As Paul Campos points out, even if we generously extend the question of qualifications to publishing (forget actually judging), very little is added to the nominee's resume:

In the nearly 20 years since Kagan became a law professor, she's published very little academic scholarship-three law review articles, along with a couple of shorter essays and two brief book reviews. Somehow, Kagan got tenure at Chicago in 1995 on the basis of a single article in The Supreme Court Review-a scholarly journal edited by Chicago's own faculty-and a short essay in the school's law review. She then worked in the Clinton administration for several years before joining Harvard as a visiting professor of law in 1999. While there she published two articles, but since receiving tenure from Harvard in 2001 (and becoming dean of the law school in 2003) she has published nothing.

Nominee Kagan hasn't even voted "present" in a judicial hearing. If confirmed, she will become the Barack Obama of the Supreme Court, winging the job as badly if not worse than the unqualified President wings his job.

However, if our Senators do their jobs this week, this will be a quick interview. The Senate should focus on the candidate's qualifications not ideological predispositions, which focus will produce fact questions that are not easily circumnavigated with non-responsive palaver.

Consider a plumbing company hire. The hiring company is mostly unconcerned about the applicant's view of installing plumbing in an abortion clinic. More relevant first questions include: How many installations have you done? Commercial or residential? As a master plumber or an apprentice?

This is common sense and Interviewing 101. Given the nominee Kagan's likely failure to pass the basic qualifications screen, questions of ideology and judicial philosophy are unnecessary and too complicated.
She should be asked: How many judicial proceedings have you overseen? What type of cases - civil, criminal, tort, constitutional, etc....? As a judge? What about private practice experience? How does your prior judicial experience compare to the experience of the current Supreme Court justices at the time of their noms

Posted by: bumblingberry | June 29, 2010 1:46 PM | Report abuse

re. Six Sen. to watch in Kagan confirmation.

Get real Chris! Kagan can't lose even if all the Republicans vote against her being confirmed.
There isn't a Democrap Socialist in congress, who'd dare vote against Comrade Obama's choice for SCJ, even if that nominee would have been his mentors of old, the racist white and America--haters Jerimiah Wright Jr. or Louis Farrakhan.

Posted by: armpeg | June 29, 2010 1:34 PM | Report abuse

Though Obama was only a state legislator in 2002, he gave a highly partisan anti-war speech that improved his standing with the left wing of the Democratic Party. "What I am opposed to," he declaimed, "is the attempt by political hacks like Karl Rove to distract us from a rise in the uninsured, a rise in the poverty rate, a drop in the median income, to distract us from corporate scandals and a stock market that has just gone through the worst month since the Great Depression." When the war began to go badly in 2006 and 2007, Obama was hailed as prescient.

After winning the nomination, Obama reiterated his opposition to the war in Iraq, which he claimed had been poorly led, unnecessary, badly motivated, and doomed to failure.

In a March 2007 Senate floor speech, Sen. Obama recited the leftist litany about Iraq. It was folly, he argued, to "go it alone" -- overlooking the fact that 27 nations participated in the coalition to remove Saddam Hussein. Obama repeated the common liberal trope of the time that only a political settlement would end the violence. "There is no military solution to this war," he pronounced.

When President Bush announced the troop surge in January 2007, Obama opposed it, saying, "I am not persuaded that 20,000 additional troops in Iraq are going to solve the sectarian violence there. In fact, I think it will do the reverse." Even a year later, when evidence mounted that the surge was working, Obama continued to push for retreat ("phased redeployment") because "I don't think the president's strategy is going to work."

Only in mid-July of 2008 did the Obama campaign scrub criticism of the surge from its website.

By turning to the architect of the Iraq surge, Gen. David Petraeus, to save the war in Afghanistan, President Obama is acknowledging, if only implicitly, that he was quite wrong about the Iraq surge and that Bush was right.

Posted by: bumblingberry | June 29, 2010 1:26 PM | Report abuse

It is absolutely amazing that the leftists if they can not control the message on this blog 100%, would rather attempt to wreck this blog -

It just shows what they are all about.


Chris - all you have to do is get your editors to give you a few links on the front page - and you will have a flood of new posters - and they will stay.

Good Luck.


.

Posted by: Heatwave | June 29, 2010 1:10 PM | Report abuse


How would you interpret the constitution, as a living document or as an original document at the time it was written? VOTE

http://www.youpolls.com/default.asp

.

Posted by: usadblake | June 29, 2010 1:01 PM | Report abuse

yeah, she did.

Posted by: DDAWD | June 29, 2010 12:59 PM | Report abuse

dawd -- got your email address.

did bb beat me to it already?

after this will be bumblingberrry bumbling all day long.

good luck with your blog, Chris! hahahha.

Posted by: drindl | June 29, 2010 12:55 PM | Report abuse

Obama's Afghan War.


By announcing the July 2012 pull-out date, Obama hurt the Surge more than the entire Taliban army.

A leftist dream, huh ?

Henry Kissinger said that if we want to win, we have to signal that we are staying - the whole war is a disaster right now - Obama has made it extremely difficult to build allies in the populace with this pull-out date.

Obama's war is a disaster.

Thank you Biden.


.

Posted by: Heatwave | June 29, 2010 12:50 PM | Report abuse

Kagen. learn from your mentor - the Messiah. It doesn't matter a whit what you say in the hearings. We all understand that all liberals lie to get their position. as follows:

Obama gave primary voters a firm assurance that if he became the nominee of the Democratic party he would (unlike Hillary Clinton) abide by the campaign finance limits of public funding; but as soon as he became the party’s nominee, he reneged on that pledge.

Candidate Obama promised us that CIA personnel involved in the interrogation of terrorists would not be prosecuted; but his administration is now doing exactly that.

Obama assured a joint session of Congress that the health bill he supported (pre-Stupak) would not provide public funding for abortions; but bitter resistance on the part of House Democrats to inclusion of language to that effect soon proved that it did.

Candidate Obama promised that he would make sure that there was always enough time for the public to read legislation before it was enacted; but he has done exactly the opposite, repeatedly pressing for even faster passage of even longer bills.

Candidate Obama promised bipartisanship and an end to partisan bickering; but in a display of especially ruthless partisanship his allies have shut Republicans out of all key meetings on his health care initiative, with the unprecedented result that domestic legislation of historic importance garnered not a single Republican vote in the Senate.

Candidate Obama criticized his opponent’s plan to tax employer paid healthcare benefits, and promised he would not tax them; but the bill he now backs will do just that.

Obama had promised that he would not sign a healthcare bill that would add one dime to the federal deficit; but the bill he now backs adds trillions in new federal spending, offset only by new sources of revenue that are both uncertain and more properly seen as offsetting the already existing deficit.

Obama has repeatedly assured the American people that if they like their current health plan they can keep it; but the House bill which he supported created huge incentives for employers to drop their coverage and shift their members to a public option.

Obama assured a joint session of Congress that his health plan would not fund illegal aliens; but his allies had been busy voting down amendments to that effect. (This was the point of Joe Wilson’s outburst.)

Obama claimed that Caterpillar’s CEO had told him that Caterpillar would begin hiring again as a result of the stimulus bill; but that individual immediately announced that he had said no such thing, and that Caterpillar would in fact be laying off more workers.

Candidate Obama promised that Guantanamo would be closed by January 1, 2010; but it is still open.


since this was written, the list has only gotten longer.

Posted by: bumblingberry | June 29, 2010 12:34 PM | Report abuse

got the email, thanks

Posted by: DDAWD | June 29, 2010 12:33 PM | Report abuse

KAGAN DISARMS WITH WIT AND CHARM

Elena Kagan is disarming and co-opting her hostile GOP inquisitors with studied grace, wit and a self-effacing display of smarts. Maybe she's not a "corporate statist" but a tough-skinned arbiter of justice for all. Impressive.

http://NowPublic.com/scrivener (lede articles and related links)

Posted by: scrivener50 | June 29, 2010 12:30 PM | Report abuse

sure, why not? email me at faulltines2000@yahoo

Posted by: DDAWD | June 29, 2010 12:25 PM | Report abuse

I might add, that unlike kingofzouk/moonbat/drivl/bumblingberry/brigade, I have never been banned or deleted, but I am bored to death by the infantile imbecility here.

Perhaps CC's long sought moderation will take place, but I doubt it will be in time to keep everyone but zook and 37 from leaving.

Posted by: drindl | June 29, 2010 12:23 PM | Report abuse

see you, dawd

-drivl

It's working. Yeah.

We have been promised this many times though. Seems there is little else in the poor loons life to wile away her empty day.

Posted by: bumblingberry | June 29, 2010 12:20 PM | Report abuse

but somehow my stuff gets deleted.


>>>>>>>>>>>>

way above your head. You should be used to that by now. at least drivl understands her limitations.

Posted by: bumblingberry | June 29, 2010 12:18 PM | Report abuse

see you, dawd. no intelligent life left here - let the idiot boys have it, just the two of them -- they deserve each other. doesn't look like anyone else reads the comments section anymore.

if you want to join that group i mentioned, say so here and I'll check back from time to time.

Posted by: drindl | June 29, 2010 12:17 PM | Report abuse

Yeah, this takes everything to a new low. I have never spammed the place, but somehow my stuff gets deleted.

Let's see if whoever is doing this at least has the guts to own up to it.

Posted by: DDAWD | June 29, 2010 12:14 PM | Report abuse

I can not tell you how many people THEY have driven away from this blog.

---

Please do. I can only think of one. Multiple personality disorders don't count.

Posted by: JakeD3 | June 29, 2010 12:12 PM | Report abuse

Gee, I disappeared? How interesting.

Posted by: drindl | June 29, 2010 12:11 PM | Report abuse

looks like all drivl, all the time.

Just like old times.

As soon as we can eliminate that particular pest, we can get back to an intelligent loon-free blog.

Posted by: bumblingberry | June 29, 2010 12:11 PM | Report abuse

that's weird, dawd. it does look to me like pretty much everyone else who used to post here is giving up on it and leaving it to zouk and 37.

I talk to quite a few people who used to be regulars here, and many of us have met now --- really interesting folks. They all agree that it's too bad this blog was ruined by spamming.

The WaPo is as eager as any Republican politician to capitulate to the childish and strident far right, as evidenced by their firing/punking of Dave Weigel.

They don't understand that no matter how they destroy their credibility, they will still be hated by the wingers and will lose everyone else in the process.

Posted by: drindl | June 29, 2010 12:06 PM | Report abuse

heh, wow, and another one bites the dust as well.

That can't be good news for Ezra Klein. He had a post a little while ago on how austerity economics hurt the economic situation in Ireland.

Wow, this board had been ridiculous for a long time, but I never thought I'd be censored.

Posted by: DDAWD | June 29, 2010 12:03 PM | Report abuse


And then there's the lunatic Glenn Beck saying:

"Blacks Don't Own Martin Luther King"

Oh, and also that "too many" have "gotten lazy and distorted Martin Luther King's ideas."

By the time November rolls around, there will not be a single black or Hispanic voter who will be able to hold their noses and vote republican.

Posted by: drindl | June 29, 2010 11:59 AM | Report abuse

'Looks like Marco Rubio had better start carrying his papers:

Florida Republican leaders have begun crafting anti-illegal-immigrant legislation modeled after an Arizona law that has incited widespread protests and fueled national and international debate over U.S. immigration policies.'

Posted by: drindl | June 29, 2010 11:53 AM | Report abuse

when did that happen, dawd? i didn't see that post.

Posted by: drindl | June 29, 2010 11:50 AM | Report abuse


The democrats do not want to talk about how the leftist environmental agenda diverted oil drilling from the frozen wasteland of ANWAR to the Gulf of Mexico.


The democrats rather blame someone else.


The democrats do not want to talk about the role the democrats in Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac - how the democrats let the mortgage market run wild - leading to the economic crisis.


The democrats rather blame someone else.


The democrats do not want to talk about Bill Clinton repealing the Glass Steagall Act - leading to the economic crisis.


They rather blame someone else.


The democrats do not want to talk about how Obama's people did not perform the safety inspections on the oil rigs properly - as Obama SAID in several speeches would be done by his people.


The democrats rather blame someone else.

Is there a pattern here ???


The democrats - and Obama's people - have been AT THE CENTER OF THESE MAJOR DISASTERS -


And they want to blame someone else.


The democrats do not want to take responsibility for anything - they want to run for office, make the decisions, but taking responsibility - they will not do that.


America deserves better. So much more. America deserves much better.

.

.

Posted by: Heatwave | June 29, 2010 11:49 AM | Report abuse

Rand paul too refuses to answer questions, unless they are 'easy.' That's really what we need in Congress. people who are so stupid they cna't answer simple questions.

' Friday, Kentucky GOP Senate candidate Rand Paul attended a meeting of the Christian Homeschool Educators of Kentucky (CHEK), where he gave a speech promoting homeschooling and fielded questions from the audience. At one point, a questioner asked Paul about his personal faith and how old he thought the planet was. Paul responded by saying that he forgot to say he “was only taking easy questions,” provoking laughter from the CHEK crowd, and then said he would “have to pass on that one”:

QUESTION: Was there a point in life where you became a Christian [...] and also, how old is the world?

PAUL: I forgot to say I was only taking easy questions. I’m gonna have to pass on the age of the earth. I think I’m just gonna have to pass on that one.'


And parents should definitely home school their children, so they can grow up to be just as stupid as they are.

Posted by: drindl | June 29, 2010 11:39 AM | Report abuse

zouk et al is spamming even worse than 37 today, dawd. he is, after all, the original spammer here.

Posted by: drindl | June 29, 2010 11:36 AM | Report abuse

Wow, my posts are being deleted now? Really?

Posted by: DDAWD | June 29, 2010 11:34 AM | Report abuse

Kagen lies, Obungler lies. What else is new:

In order to pass the first stimulus bill, Obama said Medicare would not be cut. In fact, cuts will be made.

Although Obama promised growth in the private sector, the increase of jobs is in the public sector.

Obama claimed he would limit earmarks but, in fact, there have been larger and more earmarks than ever before.


Obama was adamant that he would appoint no lobbyists to his administration. He appointed more lobbyists than his predecessors.


Obama criticized the size of George Bush's deficit ~ yet he has quadrupled the size of the deficit.

When campaigning, he was critical of bills that were too long for anyone to read and properly analyze; his bills are incredibly longer (2000+ pages) than the ones he originally criticized.

Though he claimed his administration would be transparent, Obama has maintained an unprecedented level of secrecy towards the American public. Requests for Obama to honor the promise of C-Span cameras during the final stages of Obamacare were ignored.

Obama coerced Congress into passing his stimulus bill by promising that unemployment could go no higher than 8%. Unemployment is now at 10% and Vice President Biden recently stated that eight million jobs are irretrievably lost.

But can one really blame Obama? Being deceitful is part of his being. Obviously he will never honor any promises that he makes that do not accrue to his long range desires. But why do people delude themselves and think they will not find themselves on the short end of the stick when they deal with him?

Posted by: bumblingberry | June 29, 2010 11:29 AM | Report abuse

"Fix" blog-spammer motto:

"We never forget who we're working for."

http://nowpublic.com/world/u-s-govt-censors-net-political-speech-targeted-americans
http://nowpublic.com/world/how-u-s-spy-ops-censor-web-political-speech
NowPublic.com/scrivener (lede articles and links therein)

Posted by: scrivener50 | June 29, 2010 11:29 AM | Report abuse

Sharron Angle, afraid to talk to reporters for fear people will find out what she thinks. This clip of her running from a reporter is making her a kooky laughingstock.

"There is a game in Nevada called "Where's Sharron Angle?" that the media are tired of playing.

Angle, a U.S. Senate candidate and Tea Party darling, has steadfastly refused to talk to reporters here, leading to some unusually aggressive behavior by local television stations. In a segment fit for TMZ, one intrepid reporter followed her on foot outside a restaurant this month, repeatedly asking why she had said, "If this Congress keeps going the way it is, people are really looking toward those Second Amendment remedies."

She ignored the questioner and tried to outpace him, in a video clip replayed across the state.


"I can't remember a time that we've ever had trouble with interviews," said Mary Beth Farrell, the news director at KRNV, the local NBC affiliate. "Especially with people running for office - they usually beat our door down."

Reporters said they suspect that Angle, who has said that the Environmental Protection Agency should be eliminated and that Social Security should be "transitioned out," is afraid of running into the same interview buzz saw as Rand Paul's Senate campaign did in Kentucky."

Run, Sharron, run from reporters!

Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2010/06/29/MNNS1E6EBA.DTL&feed=rss.news_politics#ixzz0sFviDurz

Posted by: drindl | June 29, 2010 11:26 AM | Report abuse

Heh, referring to the financial meltdown as an ant.

Republicans seem intent on throwing away this election cycle. They need to be going for broke here trying to scrape up every last seat they can to brace themselves for 2012. Instead they are shooting themselves in their feet day after day. They seem to have absolutely wasted Nevada. I guess it's too much of a gut check to try and see if they can't get guys like Scott Brown or Charles Djou or Joseph Cao in office.

Ok, returning the board back to 37th.

Posted by: DDAWD | June 29, 2010 11:17 AM | Report abuse

drinl writes:


So Boehner is advocating violence, treason and sedition? Perhaps we need to round up the rightwinger traitors and try them.

____________________________________

What is your comment on the left-wing violence in Toronto ???

This is the problem with the left: the conservatives ARE NOT LEGITIMATE. Their point of view is wrong. They should be banned, and if that doesn't work, put in jail.


That is not how AMERICA works.

The far leftists do not care about any American values - they just want to practice deception and lies to push through their agenda.

Leftists exposed. And they are angry about being exposed.


.

Posted by: Heatwave | June 29, 2010 11:16 AM | Report abuse


Petraeus enters crossfire on Capitol Hill
What did the Dems say to the General last time? Oh, never mind...

Posted by: bumblingberry | June 29, 2010 11:16 AM | Report abuse

That's not fair DDAWD. I'm sure it also convinced leapin and armpeg.

Posted by: JakeD3 | June 29, 2010 11:03 AM | Report abuse

"In a new interview with the Boston Herald, House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-OH) blasts Democrats “They’re snuffing out the America that I grew up in,” Boehner said, adding, “There’s a political rebellion brewing, and I don’t think we’ve seen anything like it since 1776.” Taking up the GOP agenda of defending big business at all costs, he compared the financial crisis to an “ant” and criticized Congress for passing financial reform, which he likened to a “nuclear weapon“:

Boehner criticized the financial regulatory overhaul compromise reached last week between House and Senate negotiators as an overreaction to the financial crisis that triggered the recession. The bill would tighten restrictions on lending, create a consumer protection agency with broad oversight power and give the government an orderly way to dissolve the largest financial institutions if they run out of money.

“This is killing an ant with a nuclear weapon,” Boehner said."

So Boehner is advocating violence, treason and sedition? Perhaps we need to round up the rightwinger traitors and try them.

Posted by: drindl | June 29, 2010 11:03 AM | Report abuse

Health care has improved. Jobs are improving, but Republicans are blocking all the jobs bills to speed growth, and the lack of jobs is leading to increased deficits.

And I didn't even need eighty-seven economics PhDs to understand that.

OMG, but what is this "jobs saved" thing??? I am soo confused! Let me get into a fetal position.

Posted by: DDAWD | June 29, 2010 10:56 AM | Report abuse

Never seen someone advocate for worse health, increased deficits, increased job loss, and increased environmental damage.
-DDUnce

Have you not been paying attention these last few months? that is the Obummer methodology. Ignore the spill, spend the money, ruin the economy, kill the jobs, destroy health care.

Posted by: bumblingberry | June 29, 2010 10:50 AM | Report abuse

So anyone convinced to vote with these guys yet?

Posted by: DDAWD | June 29, 2010 10:29 AM | Report abuse

Acornisascam writes:


The democrats strategy is

"using tax money to bribe and buy votes to get their Radical programs passed and and create a dependent class of voters beholden to them for handouts!"

_________________________________


I really wish this wasn't true - but to hear the democrats - and see their health care plan, I am afraid IT IS TRUE.

Unfortunately, this kind of policy will never last long - it will create an economic trap of debt - which will hurt our country and our economy for decades - when the policy will have to be abandoned anyway.


After the damage is done.

The clear problem is Obama and the democrats have decided that DECEPTION AND LIES are the only away to get this program into force.


This is what people are talking about - when they say the FAR LEFT IS FORCING THEIR AGENDA ON AMERICA.

The subsidies in the health care plan - and the INCENTIVES to businesses to throw people off of private insurance INTO the government program - are the plan WHICH HAS NOT BEEN EXPLAINED TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE.

The damage to the American economy is going to be MASSIVE.

These subsidies, if not repealed, will open up a MASSIVE DEFICIT HOLE AND MASSIVE DEBT in the health care portion of the federal budget.

This is a SERIOUS OBAMA TRAINWRECK WAITING TO HAPPEN.


AND what do we get from the Obama people? Demands that the opposition voices be silenced.

.

Posted by: Heatwave | June 29, 2010 10:11 AM | Report abuse

Looks like another "say anything to get the position, do anything after that" liberal twisting empty promises and spinning the truth.

Have liberals no shame?

Posted by: Moonbat | June 29, 2010 10:06 AM | Report abuse

Define American
We find Russian spies posing with stolen IDs getting arrested , but not Foreign Invasion from the South?

KAGAN = losthorizon10 ?

NEXT!!!!

Posted by: dottydo | June 29, 2010 10:05 AM | Report abuse

re 2) The repubs squandered their opportunity to take out Reid by nominating Angle. They're not totally out of the race, but it'll cost a lot of money that won't be available for other races. Focusing on this one is a tactical mistake - much like the Dems going after Bachmann.

Posted by: bsimon1 | June 29, 2010 9:57 AM | Report abuse

The Afghan War


This war - Obama promised he would fight this war - he said it was the good war - and Obama agreed that America was at risk from terrorists which could operate out of Afghan terroritory.

AND yet - Obama last year gave a July 2012 pull-out date - (whether there are conditions - or what are the conditions are not clear.)


The point is: IS OBAMA FIGHTING THE AFGHAN WAR PROPERLY - AS OBAMA PROMISED ?

Announcing a pull-out date significantly diminishes the effectiveness of the Surge.


Is Obama fighting the war OR pulling out ??? There really is no way to do both. It is one or the other.


Announcing the pull-out date is another broken campaign promise.

I realize there is a bunch of leftists - led by Biden - who want to get out of Afghanistan - but this is NOT what Obama said when he was elected.


I am just trying to point out that Obama platform - the country was GIVEN A SERIES OF ASSURANCES - elect Obama and you can be SURE Obama will not go too far.


HOWEVER, what the country has received from Obama a COMPLETE BREAKING OF EVERY ASSURANCE.

This is the CENTRAL FRAUD OF OBAMA.

This is NOT how government should be run.


This is NOT how our elected officials should behave.

America deserves so much better from its elected officials. It is that simple.

.

Posted by: Heatwave | June 29, 2010 9:56 AM | Report abuse

re 1) none of those senators are up for reelection this year - barring the lame duck Sen Specter. Of those Graham may feel the most pressure to vote against Kagan, but the rest will likely support her.

Posted by: bsimon1 | June 29, 2010 9:50 AM | Report abuse

I agree with the Heritage Organization that we need Supreme Court Judges that will follow the guidance of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights!

Kagan is a Progressive, Socialist, Marxist, Liberal like Obama and these views erode our Liberty and Freedom, while using tax money to bribe and buy votes to get their Radical programs passed and and create a dependent class of voters beholden to them for handouts!

We need opportunity and jobs, not Social engineering to keep a dependent voting group voting for the same Progressive, Socialist, Marxist, Radical, Liberal politicians in power and in control of the Redistribution of our tax dollars to the same dependent group that depend on them for the handouts instead of meaningful education and jobs!

Kagan is way too Liberal and will be a detriment to our freedoms with her Liberal Ideology! Keep her off the court!

Heritage knows that we need judges that will follow the Constitution for guidance!

From Heritage>

Returning the judiciary to its constitutional role.
Judges in our courts of law, especially justices of the U.S. Supreme Court, have increasingly substituted their personal moral and political views for constitutional and legal principles. Citizens feel increasingly powerless against this Imperial Judiciary, which has replaced their elected representatives in deciding momentous issues that affect our daily lives and the future of America.

The courts must be restored to their constitutional role, which is to apply the laws as written, to protect individual rights, and to enforce constitutional limits on government. There are legitimate actions Congress can take to limit the overreach of the judiciary. And it is essential that the next president appoint judges who understand the proper role of the judiciary and do not overstep its bounds.

Keep Kagan off the Court!

Hugh C Young, Metuchen, NJ

.

Posted by: Acornisascam | June 29, 2010 9:49 AM | Report abuse

I agree with the Heritage Organization that we need Supreme Court Judges that will follow the guidance of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights!

Kagan is a Progressive, Socialist, Marxist, Liberal like Obama and these views erode our Liberty and Freedom, while using tax money to bribe and buy votes to get their Radical programs passed and and create a dependent class of voters beholden to them for handouts!

We need opportunity and jobs, not Social engineering to keep a dependent voting group voting for the same Progressive, Socialist, Marxist, Radical, Liberal politicians in power and in control of the Redistribution of our tax dollars to the same dependent group that depend on them for the handouts instead of meaningful education and jobs!

Kagan is way too Liberal and will be a detriment to our freedoms with her Liberal Ideology! Keep her off the court!

Heritage knows that we need judges that will follow the Constitution for guidance!

From Heritage>

Returning the judiciary to its constitutional role.
Judges in our courts of law, especially justices of the U.S. Supreme Court, have increasingly substituted their personal moral and political views for constitutional and legal principles. Citizens feel increasingly powerless against this Imperial Judiciary, which has replaced their elected representatives in deciding momentous issues that affect our daily lives and the future of America.

The courts must be restored to their constitutional role, which is to apply the laws as written, to protect individual rights, and to enforce constitutional limits on government. There are legitimate actions Congress can take to limit the overreach of the judiciary. And it is essential that the next president appoint judges who understand the proper role of the judiciary and do not overstep its bounds.

Keep Kagan off the Court!

Hugh C Young, Metuchen, NJ

.

Posted by: Acornisascam | June 29, 2010 9:49 AM | Report abuse

I feel much sadness that media campaigns for public office are starting to look less rational that World Wrestling Entertainment plot lines. At least the wrestlers stop shouting and actually engage each other directly every once in a while, though their encounters are no more scripted than what passes for political debates these days.

And Heatwave, the "liberals" you refer to aren't the ones posting most of the long, impassioned, repetitive, and largely off-topic screeds in the Comments section. Yes, they're partisans. But they're generally on topic about it.

(In short: 37th & O by any other name would still smell like a troll.)

Posted by: Gallenod | June 29, 2010 9:47 AM | Report abuse

LARAZA defines American as anyone from the Southern Hemisphere and apparently no one from the Northern Hemispere. ( Try to be from the USA and cross their borders to live or work undocumented).
Kagan uses the term American, someone should ask her why she doesn't say US Citizen and to define American.
"every American who comes before her court will be treated equally"...shouldn't she be asked if that term American means illegals too?

No on Kagan ...next.

Posted by: dottydo | June 29, 2010 9:47 AM | Report abuse

There is no way this Constitution hating nominee should be confirmed. But the Liberals hate our Constitutional Republic and the Republicans do not have the spine to stand against her. Judging by the comments on this thread there are many Washington Post radical leftists who do not care about the Constitution either. At least the radical left fights for what they believe in even if that means the destruction of our nation.

Posted by: sonofliberty09 | June 29, 2010 9:46 AM | Report abuse

LARAZA defines American as anyone from the Southern Hemisphere and apparently no one from the Northern Hemispere. ( Try to be from the USA and cross their borders to live or work undocumented).
Kagan uses the term American, someone should ask her why she doesn't say US Citizen and to define American.
"every American who comes before her court will be treated equally"...shouldn't sahe be asked if that term American means illegals too?

Posted by: dottydo | June 29, 2010 9:46 AM | Report abuse

ddoiron1


It is a question of level of effort -

Obama promised over and over again - for years - he went around the country and said he could deliver on his bipartisanship promise.


PRACTICALLY ZERO EFFORT ON THIS ISSUE FROM OBAMA - a few pathetic meetings for the cameras.

No, Obama thought he had 60 votes, and his promises were gone -


Obama handed the American People A FRAUD.

Don't make excuses - a far left-wing agenda WAS NOT WAY OBAMA WAS ELECTED.

Let me be clear: Obama has been a fraud - there is no other way around it.

.

Posted by: Heatwave | June 29, 2010 9:44 AM | Report abuse

What will the Palinbots say when "Teatard" Tiahrt gets crushed by "Moron" Moran?

Posted by: koolkat_1960 | June 29, 2010 9:33 AM | Report abuse

No President gets to keep all his campaign Promises mainly because Congress has to pass the laws to get them done.

Bush claimed to be the one to bring bipartisanship to Congress as "The Uniter" we see how that has worked out as Republicans continue their "Our Way or the Highway" Attitude which is the same reason every piece of Legislation now requires enough votes to break a filibuster.

For over a year Obama tried to get Republican help and every hand out got bitten by those Rabid Republican Dogs and their Blue Dog buddies.

Posted by: ddoiron1 | June 29, 2010 9:32 AM | Report abuse

jetlone


Do you realize that Kagan clerked for Marshall - and she has said that her positions are much like his.


So - in the absence of a paper trail for Kagan - this is one of the few things they have to work with.


So - let me get this right - you are trying to turn that into a RACE thing ???

.

Posted by: Heatwave | June 29, 2010 9:31 AM | Report abuse

We don't have to watch any of them, she is going to be confirmed. At least you were smart enough to leave Sessions out of the equation.

Posted by: mtravali | June 29, 2010 9:29 AM | Report abuse

Republicans questions, "Are you gay? Why are you gay? Are you a liberal? Why are you not an activists judge? Why are you gay?

Republicans will do all they can to discredit Kagen, they will also vote against her!

In conclusion folks, this registered Voter/Vet USAF, has never seen America in more of a MESS/POLICE/STATE as it is now thanks to the Republicans who have locked up a "RECORD/NUMBER/AMERICAN"S in eight years of Republican rule that has turned America into a Police State with more American's in jail here than any other free country!

..."Some freedom uh....

America is building jails in the South faster than factories, as the two Republican counties here in East Tennessee put up jails one at a costs of $60 MILLION and the other one six miles away at a costs of $26 MILLION faster than factories, as these corrupt Injustice Centers lock up kids/Citizens over a joint, bring them to court, charge them court costs, on top of putting them on probation for a "YEAR, charing them $60 a month to see a probation officer, then charging them for drug tests on top on that, then, "LAUGHING ALL THE WAY TO THE BANK ON TOP OF THAT, AS THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT LOOKS THE OTHER WAY, RUNAWAY SOUTHERN STATES ARE LOCKING UP AMERICAN'S AT ALARMING RATES OVER PETTY/CRIMES/MISDEAMEANER/VIOLATIONS/PROBATION/VIOLATIONS, AND LAUGHING ALL THE WAY TO THE BANK!

THis IS INJUSTICE AT IT'S WORSE AND REPUBLICANS AT THEIR BEST!

..."True Patriotism, Hates Injustice in it's own Land, "MORE THAN ANYWHERE ELSE."
---Clarence Darrow

That is why America state rights, are out of control, and the Federal Government must act to free American's sitting in our overcrowded jails that shouldn't even be in jail!

Posted by: ztcb41 | June 29, 2010 9:23 AM | Report abuse

I find it absolutely amazing that Obama went around the country for two years with the basic message "I will clean up Washington"


Obama said he could do it -


Obama said he could bring bipartisanhip to Washington - Obama said he would do the work to bring both sides together.

And everyone recognized that bipartisanship was a difficult task - one that involved taking time to built trust - and forge out compromises.


WHERE HAS OBAMA BEEN ON THIS ???

The country - in return for its votes - gotten nothing but complaints from Obama how he has encountered so many problems which are everyone else's fault.

But - wasn't that EXACTLY what Obama said he would do - CLEAN UP THE PROBLEMS ???


Take Wall Street - these problems are in large part a result of the massive influence Wall Street lobbyists and campaign contributions play in Washington.

Obama said he would clean up problems like that.

What do we hear from Obama ? That he has all these problems from previous administrations.

Yea, but Obama said he was going to clean up those problem - THAT IS WHY OBAMA SAID THE COUNTRY SHOULD ELECT HIM.

The mortgage crisis and the economic crisis started in 2006 - the warning signs were all there - Obama walked into this situation willingly.


Bipartisanship - everyone knew this would be a difficult, long task. Obama has done NOWHERE NEAR the amount of work necessary to accomplish ANYTHING on this issue.

What we have been hearing from Obama and this administration is nothing less than PATHETIC EXCUSES.

Obama has been a horrible failure - what he has been doing is NOTHING LIKE he has promised - and yes, his campaign of 2008 has to be viewed as a FRAUD on the American People.


.

Posted by: Heatwave | June 29, 2010 9:22 AM | Report abuse

Where is the outrage about the Kagan hearings with the ole white southern guys trashing Thurgood Marshall..I was stunned at the return of the rhetoric of 1964---This is racist code and should be called out..Shame on the NYT for not reporting this disgusting behavior! Marshall was slammed 35 times yeaterday! Disgusting! Call the senators -1.800.828.0498!

The roberts activist court is 3 for 3 in corporate pandering--your free speech is worth less with 'corporate personhood'!

Posted by: jetlone | June 29, 2010 9:13 AM | Report abuse

Democrat questions to the next judge:

what's your favorite color?

Do you like ice cream?

Ever watch movies?

Need more water?

Posted by: Moonbat | June 29, 2010 9:12 AM | Report abuse

The Oil Spill in the Gulf of Mexico should be a time to re-evaluate the energy policy which this nation has had.


For far too long, the energy policy of this nation has not been thought out - rather the policy has been the resulting situation after political battles.

Specifically - ANWAR. For 25 years, the environmentalists have been fighting to protect a frozen wasteland - which provides little economic benefit to the US economy as a whole, few if any people get their income up there, and has absolutely no tourism due to its isolation.

A few cameramen have gone there in the spring - taken video of some animals during the brief thaw - and used that video to justify protecting thousands of square miles of frozen wasteland.

Our energy policy has been: Protect the frozen wasteland above ground in northern Alaska -

AND put at RISK the Gulf of Mexico, from which millions derive their family incomes, where the country gets its seafood, where there is a massive tourist industry.

Does one have to point out that if this accident WAS in ANWAR, above ground - the leak would have have been stopped a long time ago.


The country has PUSHED THE DRILLING OFFSHORE WHERE LEAKS ARE DIFFICULT TO STOP.


This is the DIRECT RESULT of what the environmentalists have wanted.


The next crazy idea of the environmenalists is cap and trade - a massive energy tax which will heap massive costs all over the economy - in places which people do not expect right now.

I care deeply about the environment - but the track record of their "solutions" has been absolutely horrible.

.

Posted by: Heatwave | June 29, 2010 9:09 AM | Report abuse

It is becoming more and more obvious that Kagan's prominence in general and her nomination for the Supreme Court in particular is NOT because of her judicial qualifications. Indeed she has minimal academic qualifications which does not speak highly of Harvard. Kagan is an insider's insider that the establishment would use in the time of their needs.

Posted by: acpress | June 29, 2010 9:02 AM | Report abuse

Kagan will be confirmed. If she were NOT to be confirmed, whining, racist criminal bigots would start throwing around false cries of antisemitism. That is the way it works in America....right, Lieberman???

Posted by: usnr02 | June 29, 2010 9:01 AM | Report abuse

Posted by: FairlingtonBlade | June 29, 2010 8:57 AM | Report abuse

losthorizon10 | ... if you knew any of the real history of America you'd know that the real racists have always been and still are in the Democrat Party. You are aware of course, so this won't be news to you, that the KKK was organized and used by the Democrat Party to control the black folk.

You are obviously also aware that the now deceased Robert Byrd, made his 'bones' as a leader in the KKK. And led the Senate fight against the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

Because your fellow Democrats bring out the phoney race card everytime the facts are not on their side (most often) is clear evidence that racism is alive and well in a wide variety of groups represented by the Democrat Party.

As an intelligent student of American history, you know all this, yet you continue to pretend that it is the Republicans who are the racists ... you evidence the fact that a brain is a terrible thing to waste.

Posted by: Hazmat77 | June 29, 2010 8:57 AM | Report abuse

Elena Kagan Explains Why It's Okay to Ban

According to Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan, laws banning books pose no First Amendment problems, because they might not be enforced.
In the Age of Hopey Change, this authoritarian apparatchik passes for a Constitutional scholar.

We just saw the crucial Second Amendment saved from being effectively repealed by a single vote. If Comrade Obama gets Kagan on the Court and then one more moonbat from the same mold, he can consider America to have been "fundamentally transformed" into something other than America.

Posted by: Moonbat | June 29, 2010 8:55 AM | Report abuse

Look for Snarlin' Arlen to use the Kagan hearings to show that he's the "better" Democrat by forcing the nominee to state her views on corporate influence over the financing of elections. It appears he'll have an ally in Al Franken, who once again demonstrated in his opening statement that he's no jokester when it comes to speaking truth to power.

***

FUSION CENTER GESTAPO USES JOURNO'S CELL PHONE TO TARGET MICROWAVE TORTURE

• Longtime mainstream journalist exposing U.S. government cell tower- based microwave laser radio frequency directed energy weapon torture of extrajudically persecuted Americans sees evidence that President Obama has been a target of silent electromagnetic assault and entrainment.

http://nowpublic.com/world/fed-gestapo-uses-journos-cell-phone-target-microwave-torture
http://nowpublic.com/world/u-s-silently-tortures-americans-cell-tower-microwaves
NowPublic.com/scrivener (lede stories and links therein) OR Facebook -- Vic Livingston ("Notes")

Posted by: scrivener50 | June 29, 2010 8:53 AM | Report abuse

Moonbat


I certainly hope all the leftist loons do leave.


They have created a highly negative atmosphere on this blog for years.

The name-calling and harassment - as you well know - has been far out of control for way too long.

I think noacoler said he would join the boycott too -


Is it possible that could be true ?


.

Posted by: Heatwave | June 29, 2010 8:53 AM | Report abuse

Durbin, Shumer and Franken .... LOL

These three retards will be falling all over themselves to make Kagan look good.

Posted by: Hazmat77 | June 29, 2010 8:48 AM | Report abuse

I am so excited about the "boycott". It could be the first day in years of intelligent content with all the loons missing.

Only problem is liberals never do what they promise. What else would drivl and Ped do? Visit with friends. Hahahahahahahaha

Posted by: Moonbat | June 29, 2010 8:46 AM | Report abuse

The country should take serious issue with Kagan's assertion that she is in favor of a "moderate" role for the Supreme Court.


This line sounds oddly familiar - echoing Sotomeyer's promises and assurances that she was a "moderate."

Clearly, Sotomeyer has been firmly in the liberal block of the Court - and nothing about anything she has done has been "moderate." The American People have to view her testimony last year as at the least decpetive - and the truth is closer to she lied to Congress.

NOW we are supposed to believe that Kagan wants a "moderate" role for the Supreme Court ???

This is a pattern - a pattern of Obama's nominees going in front of Congress with basic deceptions and lies. This is not how these hearings for the Supreme Court should be conducted. A degree of "puffing" is acceptable - but this is going too far.

These hearings - in the end - are what the public and the media demand what they are.

If the media lets them get away with this - then they get away with it. There were some op-ed articles with Sotomeyer last year - that her assertions were beyond what a reasonable person should believe - for a lifetime appointment - one should not be allowed to lie into that.


.

Posted by: Heatwave | June 29, 2010 8:43 AM | Report abuse

The country should take serious issue with Kagan's assertion that she is in favor of a "moderate" role for the Supreme Court.


This line sounds oddly familiar - echoing Sotomeyer's promises and assurances that she was a "moderate."

Clearly, Sotomeyer has been firmly in the liberal block of the Court - and nothing about anything she has done has been "moderate." The American People have to view her testimony last year as at the least decpetive - and the truth is closer to she lied to Congress.

NOW we are supposed to believe that Kagan wants a "moderate" role for the Supreme Court ???

This is a pattern - a pattern of Obama's nominees going in front of Congress with basic deceptions and lies. This is not how these hearings for the Supreme Court should be conducted. A degree of "puffing" is acceptable - but this is going too far.

These hearings - in the end - are what the public and the media demand what they are.

If the media lets them get away with this - then they get away with it. There were some op-ed articles with Sotomeyer last year - that her assertions were beyond what a reasonable person should believe - for a lifetime appointment - one should not be allowed to lie into that.


.

Posted by: Heatwave | June 29, 2010 8:43 AM | Report abuse

Oh, and why is this (at 8:39, anyway) the lead story on the home page?

Posted by: curmudgeon6 | June 29, 2010 8:40 AM | Report abuse

Oh, c'mon, Chris, this is pretty lame. You must be desperate for a topic to cause controversy about. Four of these six guys are Democrats, and there isn't the slightest chance in hell they won't vote for Kagan. What's worse is, you darn well know it. Chances are fairly good Hatch and Graham will, too, and maybe six or eight other Republicans. The fact is, this nomination will pretty much sail through, and no one needs you to hype a wiff of drama into it where there isn't any.

Posted by: curmudgeon6 | June 29, 2010 8:37 AM | Report abuse

Just watch the red state republicans spout off and show themselves for the hateful little bigots that they are.

The republicans clearly think that they have a national forum to safely attack Thurgood Marshall for some strange reason, and they are gleefully showing their base what good little racists they are.

Posted by: losthorizon10 | June 29, 2010 8:36 AM | Report abuse

Hatch will vote for her, because he knows that nominations are not the place where you make political points. The Senate's job is to determine if the nominee is qualified, which Kagan is. The same goes for Graham.

Posted by: AndyR3 | June 29, 2010 8:30 AM | Report abuse

The Moveon.org people - whether they are working with Organizing for America or whichever group - is demanding to control the message here.

I can not tell you how many people THEY have driven away from this blog.

In 2008, they were on this blog, in shifts - everyday - they harassed and mocked every person who posted anything with which they did not agree.

They have created a hostile atmosphere here.

If conservatives want to blog here, they have to put up with a constant stream of harassment, name-calling and snide remarks - mostly from the handfull of leftist posters.


The archives are right there for all to see and to see what has been going on.

Yes - those people do not like the opposing views. But that is what politics is all about - you have to read opposing views.

Yes - there has been a degree of push-back. But this push-back has been legitimate - especially in response to the over-all hostile atmosphere which the left has created here.

For a long time, for years, I have said there is a core group of leftists on this blog who are working together - this is clear evidence that charge is true.

They are desperate to drive out conservative voices ahead of the midterm elections - and to try to push their message of deceptions, lies and garbage on the American people.

This is an internet strategy of these leftist groups - The Washington Post should recognize this for what it is.

There has been a general lack of enforcement of the rules here - which the leftists have taken advantage of to harass the conservatives for a long time.


This lack of enforcement - and watching the leftists get away with everything - has caused everyone to wonder what the rules really are - and it is extremely vague what gets enforced and what doesn't.

I don't know what to say - but this core group is demanding to control the message here - and they have driven out many many people by their campaign of harassment and mocking -


The archives are there. This is what has been happening.


Don't worry Chris - I will guarantee you if this core group really does leave (because I think they are not serious and they will be back) - you will get new people here - and this blog will be FAR BETTER WITHOUT THEM -

So, my recommendation is to get your editors to post a few direct links to the Fix on the front page of the website - and you will find a flood of new people posting here.


If the core group of leftists are not here to harass and mock them, they will stay.

.

Posted by: Heatwave | June 29, 2010 8:23 AM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company